When Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. posed the question, “Where do we go from here: Chaos or Community?” in his book of the same title 50 years ago, no one could have imagined that we would still be wrestling with this question today. Over the past year, our nation has experienced a divisive election in which racism, xenophobia, and religious bigotry were a constant. We still find racism an open wound in our nation, resulting in the disproportionate killing of black and brown bodies and stunting their lives through unjust economic and social structures. The militarization of our police is a reflection not only of broken communal values, but also a lopsided foreign policy that spends drastically more on defense than diplomacy or development. Militarism continues to be the United States’ overriding approach to resolving conflict, despite studies that show the effectiveness of peacebuilding and the power of non-violence. Extreme materialism threatens our souls and our very planet, as prosperity narratives and unchecked capitalism spreads despite overwhelming scientific evidence that our current path is unsustainable. As in Dr. King’s time, we teeter precariously between chaos and community.

Join us April 21 for Compassion Peace and Justice Training Day at New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington DC. Gather with your fellow Presbyterians as we look at how our church and our partners are confronting racism, materialism, and militarism in our country and abroad. In plenaries and workshops we will analyze our current context and offer concrete tools for members and their congregations to address these urgent issues. We will learn how we can “forge community” amidst the current chaos in our country.

After Compassion Peace and Justice Training Day join the ecumenical community for Ecumenical Advocacy Days April 21-24. Almost one thousand Christian advocates join us every year for a weekend of workshops, lectures, and concrete actions addressing the ills of our nation. The weekend culminates in a lobby day on Monday, April 24th when we raise our voices in the halls of power for a more just society.

of the
Great Sioux Reservation, as commencing on the 46th parallel of north latitude
to the east bank of Missouri River, south along the east bank to the Nebraska
line, then west to the 104th parallel of west longitude. (15 stat. 635).

The
Great Sioux Reservation comprised all of present-day South Dakota west of the
Missouri River, including the sacred Black Hills and the Missouri River. Under
article 11 of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty, the Great Sioux Nation retained
off-reservation hunting rights to a much larger area, south to the Republican
and Platte Rivers, and east to the Big Horn Mountains. Under article 12,
no cession of land would be valid unless approved by three-fourths of the adult
males. Nevertheless, the Congress unilaterally passed the Act of February 28,
1877 (19 stat. 254), removing the Sacred Black Hills from the Great Sioux
Reservation. The United States never obtained the consent of three-fourths
of the Sioux, as required in the Treaty of Ft. Laramie. The U.S. Supreme
Court concluded that "A more ripe and rank case of dishonorable dealings
will never, in all probability, be found in our history." United
States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371, 388 (1980).

Lands Opened to development and sale by the Dawes Act of 1889

The Standing Rock Sioux Reservation
was greatly reduced through the Act of March 2, 1889, also known as the Dawes
Act and the Allotment Act. This opened up the reservations throughout the
United States to settlement by non-Indian entities, thus creating
checker-boarded land ownership within the Standing Rock Reservation. The tribe
maintains jurisdiction on all reservation lands, including rights-of-way,
waterways, and streams running through the reservation; this in turn leads to
on-going jurisdictional disputes in criminal and civil court. Recent cases such
as Nevada vs Hicks have contributed to the contentious issues in this iron
triangle between the Federal, State, and Tribal governments.

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe stands
by its right to self-government as a sovereign nation, which includes taking a
government-to-government stance with the states and federal government
entities. The Tribe signed treaties as equals with the United States Government
in 1851 and in 1868, which established the original boundaries of the Great
Sioux Nation. The tribe staunchly asserts these treaty rights to remain
steadfast and just as applicable today as on the day they were made.

The Dakota Access
Pipeline (DAPL), in a pipeline project operated by Dakota Access LLC, a
subsidiary of Houston based corporation, Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. The
DAPL, also known as the Bakken Pipeline, would transport 450,000 barrels of
crude oil per day from the Bakken fields of North Dakota to Patoka, Illinois.

Despite strong objections from the
Tribe from the first time they heard of the project, on July 25, 2016, the U.S
Army Corps of Engineers granted authorization to the Dakota Access Pipeline to
cross Lake Oahe. The current route of construction takes the pipeline less than
one half mile from the Tribe’s reservation border, and thus the Tribe maintains
a sovereign interest in protecting its cultural resources and patrimony that
remain with the land. The pipeline would cross the Tribe’s traditional and
ancestral lands and the construction of the pipeline jeopardizes many sacred
places[1].

According
to Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Chairman, David Archambault, the tribe was
presented with already completed plans for the pipeline during consultation. In
contrast, he noted that other federal agencies such as the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) share early notification of projects before
embarking on construction. “Tribes should be at the steering level of such
infrastructure projects,” Archambault said[2].

On
April 1, 2016 the Sacred Stone Camp was established by Standing Rock Sioux
tribe members and allies with the goal of protecting the tribe’s drinking water
and their sacred lands. Since that time, the protest has grown to include
several camps of peaceful and prayerful protestors who employ non-violent
direct action tactics to stop the construction of the pipeline.

Photo Credit to Tomas Alejo

The
response by law enforcement to evict and repress water protectors has escalated
over the past months. Police and private security representatives have unleashed dogs, pepper spray, and military grade weapons on
protestors and tribe members, including children. The camps have seen increased
military and militarized police presence, which tribe members say is an
unnecessary display of force against peaceful protestors. Those arrested have reported being strip searched and intimidated. David
Archambault II, Chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, haswritten a letterto U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch
in which he notes, “state and local law enforcement have increasingly taken
steps to militarize their presence, intimidate participants who are lawfully
expressing their views, and to escalate tensions and promote fear.”

What is the current
status of litigation to stop the pipeline?

There are two broad
issues of concern to the Standing Rock Sioux. First, the pipeline would pass
under the Missouri River (at Lake Oahe) just a half a mile upstream of the
tribe’s reservation boundary, where a spill would be culturally and economically
catastrophic. Second, the pipeline would pass through areas of
great cultural significance, such as sacred sites and burial grounds that
federal law seeks to protect.

The Tribe sued
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which
is the primary federal agency that granted permits needed for the pipeline to
be constructed. The lawsuit alleges that the Corps violated multiple federal
statutes, including the Clean Water Act, National Historic Protection Act, and
National Environmental Policy Act, when it issued the permits.

Because the Corps owns
land on either side of Lake Oahe, Dakota Access must get an “easement” from the
Corps to dig the tunnel for the pipeline underneath federally owned lands.
Dakota Access only needs the easement for the drilling underneath Lake Oahe; it
has permits to construct everything else, such as the access road and pipeline
route up to the Lake Oahe crossing site.

For a litigation timeline and to read key documents pertaining
to the case, please refer to the Earth Justice website:
http://earthjustice.org/features/faq-standing-rock-litigation

What is the PC(USA)’s
stand on the protests taking place against the Dakota Access pipeline on the
Standing Rock Sioux Reservation?

Recognizing
the call of Jesus to stand with those who seek justice, Presbyterians have
supported the water protectors in prayer. We have traveled to Standing Rock and
have made financial contributions and provided supplies. We have signed
petitions, made phone calls, and written letters to public officials and
corporate leaders. Strong support for the land defense
effort by the Standing Rock Sioux is one step towards right relationship with
Native people who are on the frontlines of protecting God’s good creation.

This show of
support is a timely response to actions of the 222nd General Assembly in
Portland Oregon in June 2016, which approved:

·An apology to Native American’s for
the church’s involvement and administration of boarding schools during the late
19th and early 20th centuries whose purpose was the “civilization” of Native
American children.

·A repudiation of the Doctrine of
Discovery: this “doctrine” derives its authority from Pope’s and European royal
decrees stating “explorers” may seize lands and convert “non-Christians” in
their name and for the good of the Christian Church. It remains the basis, as
late as 2005, for Indian Law and Supreme Court decisions against Tribes.

The Rev.
Dr. J. Herbert Nelson III, Stated Clerk of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), in
conjunction with the Rev. Irvin Porter, associate in the Office of Native
American Intercultural Congregational Support, issued a statement in support of the Standing Rock Sioux on August 29, 2016.

The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) files this comment in response to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) proposed rule on payday, vehicle title, and certain high cost installment loans. Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments. The rule is a critical step in stopping the harms of unaffordable loans, but the rule must be strengthened to ensure it stops the debt trap once and for all.

The Presbyterian Office of Public Witness is the public policy information and advocacy office of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Its task is to advocate, and help the church to advocate, the social witness perspectives and policies of the Presbyterian General Assembly. In 2006, the PC(USA) General Assembly passed a resolution entitled “A Reformed Understanding of Usury for the 21st Century,” which highlighted the questionable practices of the payday lending industry that trap the working poor in cycles of debt.

Stated Clerk of the PC(USA), Reverend J. Herbert Nelson recalls his time pastoring a poor inner city Presbyterian congregation in Memphis, Tennessee like this: “One of the chief concerns in our community was the strife caused by injustices of payday lending. The debt trap in which many of our congregants were continually ensnared was a result of low wages from employers and predatory lending practices by payday loan sharks, furniture rentals and check cashing. These immoral lenders preyed on the poor and left whole families in debt that directly resulted from intentional exploitive practices."

The core principle of the CFPB’s proposal is the right approach – requiring lenders to ensure that a loan is affordable without having to re-borrow or default on other expenses. This is critically important to stopping the harms of this predatory business model, and we strongly support this approach. This basic principle though must be applied to every loan – with no exceptions and no room for future evasion. As currently written, the proposed rule contains dangerous loopholes that significantly undermine this standard.

The proposal allows too many dangerous exceptions to its ability to repay test. For example, the draft proposal would allow six payday loans a year to be made without any ability-to-repay standard. Given that payday loans carry costs as high as 391% on average, this is six unaffordable loans too many. Even a single unaffordable loan can create a cascade of financial consequences for borrowers. In addition, the rule exempts longer-term payday loans with high origination fees from its proposed ability-to repay-test. These loopholes must be closed. We urge the CFPB to require an ability-to-repay determination on every loan, with no exceptions.

The draft rule does not go far enough to ensure that people have enough money to live on after repaying the loan. Right now, the proposal may allow lenders to simply continue “business as usual.” To fix this, lenders should be required to use an objective measure for reasonably projecting a borrower's basic living expenses, and avoid over-reliance on back-end measures like default and reborrowing rates. Even low default rates are not sufficient evidence of ability-to-repay, given the lender's ability to coerce repayment through control over the borrower's bank account or car. At the same time, the CFPB should take care not to sanction industry-wide high rates of defaults and reborrowing by comparing one payday lender's default rates only to other payday lenders' default rates. The CFPB can and should close the “business as usual” loopholes in the ability-to-repay test by requiring lenders to show that loan payments will leave borrowers with enough money to be able to pay their necessary expenses, and not allow them to rely on already too low industry standards as evidence that loans as affordable.

The rule does not provide sufficient protections against flipping borrowers from one unaffordable loan to the next. For short-term loans, the CFPB must do better to ensure that short-term debt does not become unaffordable long-term debt. We are concerned that under the draft rule someone could still be stuck in ten or more short-term loans in a year. The final rule should ensure a 60-day cooling off period, rather than just 30 days as proposed, between each short-term loan. It should also ensure that short-term loan indebtedness does not exceed a total of 90 days every 12 months, consistent with FDIC 2005 guidelines for its banks. In addition, it is critically important to strengthen the protections against repeat refinancing of longer-term loans. If lenders can repeatedly flip borrowers from one long-term loan into another, debt will continue to pile up and borrowers will once again be stuck in a debt trap. We support measures to strengthen protections against flipping loans, such as prohibiting more than one refinancing of these loans.

Many abusive loans still fall outside of the scope of the proposed rules, and should be covered. One concerning loophole ripe for exploitation by predatory lenders is the proposal that high-cost longer terms loans are not covered if the lender waits just a few days to can leverage over the borrower's bank account or car title, even if these loans carry rates as high as 300%. All loans secured by a bank account or car title should be covered by the rule, regardless of when security is taken. In addition, loans where lenders can aggressively collect by garnishing wages or taking access to a borrower's personal property should be subject to the CFPB's ability to repay test.

We are thankful that one loophole has already been closed – an exemption from the proposed ability-to-repay test, included in the Bureau's preliminary outline, if loan payments are less than 5% of a borrower’s income. Examining income only is not enough to determine if a loan is affordable. We call on the CFPB to close the remaining loopholes and issue the strongest rule possible to stop the harmful debt trap of unaffordable payday loans.

Today, there are 14 states plus the District of Columbia that enforce rate caps that effectively prohibit these dangerous payday loans, and families are better off. Capping the rates on payday and car title loans at about 36% is the most effective way to prevent these harms. The CFPB must not undermine these strong state laws, and must go further to deem that making or offering a loan in violation of a state law is an unfair, abusive, and deceptive practice.

In its absence of being able to cap he rates on these abusive high-cost loans, for the CFPB rule to curb this vicious cycle of debt, it must close these loopholes and strengthen provisions to ensure a meaningful ability to repay test for each and every loan.

Thursday, September 22, 2016

The Dakota Access Pipeline
(DAPL) is a planned 1,172-mile oil pipeline, with an expected capacity of
500,000 barrels of oil per day. The pipeline would originate in the Bakken oil
fields in North Dakota and terminate in Pakota, Illinois. For frequently asked questions on case litigation, please refer HERE.

The U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers approved the construction of the pipeline under the Missouri River
just one mile north of the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, home to the
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. The proximity of this pipeline to the Missouri River
could threaten the Sioux people’s access to clean water, and in April 2016, the
Standing Rock Sioux initiated a protest effort to protect this international
human right.

Tribal leaders also argue that the pipeline infringes upon their
sacred burial grounds, and in July, the Reservation sued the Army Corps of
Engineers over their failure to conduct meaningful consultation and to adhere
to environmental and historical protection regulations. While the judge ruled
against the Sioux’s request on September 9th, 2016, on this same day, the Army
Corps of Engineers, with the support of the Departments of Justice and Interior,
halted the pipeline’s construction near key tribal lands until they could fully
review the permits granted for construction. On February 8, the Army Corps granted the final easement to complete construction on the Dakota Access Pipeline and construction is moving forward.

Since April, 2016 a growing
popular movement lead by indigenous people has formed at the site of pipeline
construction. As of mid-September, thousands of native and non native
protestors have demonstrated support at the protest camps, and an unprecedented
180 tribal nations have sent letters of solidarity. These camps are being
monitored by the National Guard, and private security companies have attacked
some protestors with dogs, among whom number women and children. There are between 200 and 300 people currently residing in the camps and North Dakota Governor Burgam has issued an evacuation order to be enacted on February 22nd.

Our Stake As Presbyterians:

General Assemblies of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and its predecessors have affirmed the sovereignty and treaty rights of Native American tribes on numerous occasions. For example, the 193rd General Assembly (1981) of the United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America called the President of the United States to develop “a national Indian policy that is consistent with the concerns of Indian people for self-determination, tribal sovereignty, economic self-sufficiency, and preservation of treaty rights.”

Building on a long history of General Assembly policy related to the environment, the 222nd General Assembly (2016) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) approved an action empowering the Presbyterian Mission Agency to witness against environmental degradation and to affirm public policy that supports good stewardship of natural resources.” Among the environmental concerns identified were threats from “all modes of fossil fuel extraction, processing, transport, and storage.”

What can you do?

a.defund banks that support the DAPL. Close your
accounts and encourage all organizations, governments and colleges you are
associated with to do the same. A list of these can be found HERE along with a guide and support to closing your account.

b.Donate
money to:Synod of Lakes and Prairies, 2115 Cliff
Drive, Eagan, MN 5512. Payable to: Synod of Lakes and Prairies; note:
Dakota Access Pipeline Acct #2087, to help defend those who have
been arrested and to fight in court the easement granted by the Army Corps of
Engineers.

d.PRAY for those at Standing Rock and pray that God’s justice will prevail with
the DAPL. Many thanks to Carolyn Winfrey Gillette who wrote new hymns to be sung in solidarity with water protectors. They can be found HERE.

e.SPEAK OUT REPEATEDLY to government officials, especially your U.S.
Senators and Representatives.Call Senator
Maria Cantwell, Chair of the Committee on Indian Affairs and other members of
the committee.Congress.gov has contact information for
legislators as well as pending bills and other legislative information and activities.

f.Stay informed. Know the facts.Keep your
contacts informed through social media. Helpful accounts to follow are

Thanks to Irvin Porter, Elona Street-Stewart, Mark Koenig, and Gary Payton and Presbyterians for Earth Care for their contributions to this guide.

About Me

The Presbyterian Office of Public Witness is the public policy information and advocacy office of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). Its task is to advocate, and help the church to advocate, the social witness perspectives and policies of the Presbyterian General Assembly. The church has a long history of applying these biblically and theologically-based insights to issues that affect the public — maintaining a public policy ministry in the nation's capital since 1946.
Reformed theology teaches that because a sovereign God is at work in all the world, the church and Christian citizens should be concerned about public policy. In addition, Presbyterian forefather John Calvin wrote, "Civil magistry is a calling not only holy and legitimate, but by far the most sacred and honorable in human life."